AMD FirePro W4170M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M vs AMD FirePro W4170M

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M and AMD FirePro W4170M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different worlds: one aimed at consumer laptops, the other at professional mobile workstations. The benchmark data shows a clear but narrow performance gap, with the GTX 760M taking the only head-to-head test by 11.3%. However, the two cards target different workloads and system requirements, making the choice less about raw speed and more about what you plan to do with the laptop.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the only shared benchmark test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5,604 versus 5,034 for the AMD FirePro W4170M, a delta of 11.3%.

Q: How do these cards rank among all GPUs?

A: The GTX 760M sits at the 31st percentile, while the FirePro W4170M is at the 30th percentile. Both are within 1 percentile point of each other, indicating near-identical overall standing.

Q: Do they use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 760M uses the GK106S chip with 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the FirePro W4170M uses the Opal chip with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: Both feature 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. The GTX 760M has a bandwidth of 64.13 GB/s, while the FirePro W4170M is nearly identical at 64.00 GB/s.

Q: Which card has higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD FirePro W4170M runs at a base clock of 825 MHz and boost of 900 MHz, while the NVIDIA GTX 760M has a lower base of 628 MHz and boost of 719 MHz. The memory clocks are effectively the same at 4 Gbps effective.

Q: What API support differences exist between the two?

A: Both support DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan, but the GTX 760M lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the FirePro W4170M lists DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD card has a slightly higher DirectX feature level.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M wins on raw compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5,604 beats the FirePro W4170M's 5,034 by 11.3%. It also has a higher average benchmark score of 5,236 compared to 5,034 for the AMD card. The GTX 760M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M at 5,308 (only 1.3% higher) and the GeForce 940M at 5,284 (0.9% higher), placing it in solid company for its class.

The AMD FirePro W4170M wins on efficiency per transistor. Despite having only 950 million transistors versus 2,540 million on the NVIDIA chip, it achieves 5,034 in OpenCL, which is just 11.3% behind a GPU with 2.7 times more transistors. Its transistor density of 12.3M per mm² is also slightly higher than the GTX 760M's 11.5M per mm², indicating a more compact and dense design.

For system integration, the FirePro W4170M uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the GTX 760M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. This means the NVIDIA card requires double the PCIe lanes, which could matter in systems with limited bandwidth availability. The FirePro's lower power footprint (no TDP listed, but with far fewer transistors) makes it a more flexible option for thinner professional laptops.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M is built on the Kepler architecture with the GK106S chip. Kepler was designed for high shader throughput, and the GTX 760M packs 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. This is a wide, parallel design that excels at compute workloads that can use many threads simultaneously.

The AMD FirePro W4170M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Opal chip. GCN (Graphics Core Next) was AMD's shift toward a more compute-oriented design, but the Opal chip is a much smaller implementation with only 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is exactly half the shading units and TMUs of the GTX 760M, and half the ROPs as well. Despite this, the FirePro nearly keeps pace in OpenCL performance, thanks to its higher clock speeds of 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost, compared to 628 MHz and 719 MHz on the NVIDIA card.

The transistor counts tell a dramatic story. The GTX 760M uses 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the FirePro W4170M uses just 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. This makes the NVIDIA chip 2.87 times larger in die area and 2.67 times more transistor-rich. The transistor density is similar — 11.5M per mm² for NVIDIA versus 12.3M per mm² for AMD — but the NVIDIA chip clearly devotes far more silicon to execution resources.

Specification Differences

The core specification differences between the two cards are stark. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M has 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the AMD FirePro W4170M has exactly half of each: 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The GTX 760M also produces higher theoretical throughput, with a pixel rate of 11.50 GPixel/s versus 7.200 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 46.02 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance of 1,104.4 GFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS.

Clock speeds favor AMD. The FirePro W4170M runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost, while the GTX 760M is at 628 MHz base and 719 MHz boost. Memory clocks are effectively identical at 1,002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA and 1,000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for AMD. Memory bandwidth is also nearly the same: 64.13 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s.

The bus interface differs: NVIDIA uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Both are MXM modules with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The GTX 760M has a TDP of 55 W, while the FirePro W4170M has no TDP listed in the data. Neither card lists a launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it favors NVIDIA. The GTX 760M scores 5,604 against the FirePro W4170M's 5,034, a winning margin of 11.3%. This is a meaningful gap in compute workloads, but not a dominant one. For context, the GTX 760M's nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M, scores 5,211 (0.5% lower), while the GeForce GTX 980M scores 5,308 (1.3% higher). The FirePro W4170M's closest competitor, the AMD Radeon R5 M430, scores 5,018 (0.3% lower), and the Radeon R7 M340 scores 5,063 (0.6% higher).

Looking at average benchmark scores, the GTX 760M averages 5,236 across its two tests (OpenCL and Vulkan), while the FirePro W4170M averages 5,034 from its single OpenCL test. The GTX 760M's Vulkan score of 4,868 is notably lower than its OpenCL score, suggesting that its Kepler architecture is less optimized for modern Vulkan workloads. The FirePro W4170M has no Vulkan score listed, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible.

The GTX 760M's 11.3% lead in OpenCL is consistent with its hardware advantages: double the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, plus 1.6 times the FP32 throughput. However, the FirePro W4170M's higher clocks help it close the gap, and it achieves 62.6% of the NVIDIA card's FP32 performance with only 50% of the shading units and 37.5% of the TMUs.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward recommendation for raw compute performance: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M is the faster GPU. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 11.3%, has a higher average benchmark score (5,236 versus 5,034), and sits at a slightly higher percentile (31st versus 30th). If your primary concern is OpenCL compute, gaming, or any workload that leverages the NVIDIA card's 768 shading units and 1,104.4 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, the GTX 760M is the clear choice.

However, the AMD FirePro W4170M is not without merit. It achieves 90% of the GTX 760M's OpenCL score (5,034 versus 5,604) while using only 37% of the transistors (950 million versus 2,540 million). This makes it a far more efficient design per transistor, and its smaller 77 mm² die and PCIe 3.0 x8 interface suggest it is better suited for compact, power-sensitive professional laptops. The FirePro brand also traditionally targets workstation applications, and its DirectX 12 (11_1) support is marginally higher than the GTX 760M's DirectX 12 (11_0).

For a builder choosing between these two end-of-life mobile GPUs, the decision hinges on priorities. If you need maximum compute performance in a laptop that can accommodate a 55 W TDP and a PCIe x16 interface, the GTX 760M delivers a measurable 11.3% advantage. If you are integrating into a thinner, lower-power professional system where the GPU's physical footprint and transistor efficiency matter more than raw throughput, the FirePro W4170M offers near-competitive performance with a much leaner implementation. The benchmark results do not declare a universal winner — they show a 11.3% performance gap in favor of NVIDIA, with AMD compensating through architectural efficiency and higher clock speeds.